Texas petition
Category: Creationism
Posted on: October 15, 2008 3:08 PM, by PZ Myers
If you're concerned about the escalating creationist activity in the Texas Board of Education, then SIGN THIS PETITION. Now. Let's send a message.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Search this blog
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
(Complete listing)It is an article of passionate faith among "politically correct" biologists and anthropologists that brain size has no connection with intelligence; that intelligence has nothing to do with genes; and that genes are probably nasty fascist things anyway.
Richard Dawkins
Recent Posts
- I wish this were a Poe
- Radio reminder
- Not my cup of tea
- Zombies defend Christmas!
- Nice shirt
- Faith hurts
- There probably isn't
- Enduring damage
- Casey Luskin writes a revealing letter
- Come on down
A Taste of Pharyngula
(Complete listing)Generating right-left asymmetries
Modules and the promise of the evo-devo research program
I think I despise anti-environmentalists as much as I do anti-evolutionists
Recent Comments
- Noadi on Not my cup of tea
- MissPrism on I wish this were a Poe
- Alfonso Armenta on I wish this were a Poe
- SC on Faith hurts
- Phil E. Drifter on Faith hurts
- 'This Himself on Casey Luskin writes a revealing letter
- Dutch Delight on I wish this were a Poe
- mayhempix on Not my cup of tea
- Evolved Rationalist on Not my cup of tea
- spyderkl on I wish this were a Poe
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Blogroll
(Complete listing)Other Information
Subscribe via Email
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« Portrait of a Palin presidency | Main | Tangled Bank #116 »
Comments
Posted by: john ilya | October 15, 2008 3:15 PM
done and done
Posted by: Alex | October 15, 2008 3:17 PM
Done.
Posted by: Glen Davidson | October 15, 2008 3:23 PM
I've seen comments that claim that "all they're doing" is trying to keep the old "teach the weaknesses" language, as if that is acceptable.
I'd like to see math being taught along with its "weaknesses". Gee, I wonder if the geometries of Riemann and of Lobechevsky really need to be taught to children who still don't know Euclid's geometry.
It really is the same principle, essentially the desire to prevent the teaching of the basics which are needed even to produce intelligent criticisms of either Euclidean geometry or evolution.
The only saving grace of the language these IDiots want to "defend" is that reportedly few teachers have availed themselves of the chance to confuse children.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Dennis N | October 15, 2008 3:24 PM
Done, done, and done.
Posted by: Cephus | October 15, 2008 3:25 PM
Hey, if we're going to be "teaching the weakness", should we be teaching the "demon theory of disease" alongside germ theory? Might as well give it even-handed coverage, right?
Posted by: SASnSA | October 15, 2008 3:26 PM
Signed! What's worse is they imported the big guns to push the issue. Maybe we should get PZ and RD on the board to "balance" things out properly.
Posted by: James F | October 15, 2008 3:27 PM
Signed several months ago!
Posted by: Azdak | October 15, 2008 3:30 PM
I notice they've allowed for provinces and postal codes, but is it helpful or useful non-Americans (or even non-Texans) to sign this petition? Usually when Canadians weigh in on American issues, Americans tend to want to tell us to piss off (especially if they disagree), and that reaction is not necessarily unreasonable. Obviously, I'd prefer that Texan schoolchildren learn real, actual science in their science classes (crazy notion!), but given that I don't actually live there, I don't imagine I have (or should have) much of a say in that.
Basically, I'd sign the thing if I didn't think that having non-resident signatures might actually undermine the petition (i.e.: the opposition takes one look at the petition and says, "it's signed by a bunch of Canadians and Europeans, so it's not valid.").
Posted by: The Petey | October 15, 2008 3:32 PM
If you want to see a doctrine of ignorant, close-minded hate, look for the "Texas Republican 2008" platform.
Posted by: Dirty Hairy | October 15, 2008 3:35 PM
Done.
Posted by: Autumn | October 15, 2008 3:36 PM
Azdak,
The importance of non-Texans, at least American non-Texans, making their voices heard is the huge influence the Texas market has on nation-wide texbook publishing decisions. Essentially, any textbook which can be sold to Texas, California, or Florida stands a great chance at becoming the de facto text for the rest of the country.
Posted by: schism | October 15, 2008 3:37 PM
Azdak, if it makes you feel better, I'm a Texan and I signed the thing.
Posted by: Walton | October 15, 2008 3:57 PM
Are non-US citizens allowed to sign the petition? Because for the record, I'd be happy to.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | October 15, 2008 3:59 PM
I signed it (used my real name too: Hyperdave Kingston Sylvia Nikolaos Running-Tap Fourteen Brownian), and I'm Canadian, so you're not the only one, Azdak.
As I've come to learn from the Pharyngulons (and as Autumn noted above), states like TX, CA, FL have inordinate influence on what goes into textbooks, so, unless you want kids in Bio 30 studying from Biology: The Parts of My Body that Aren't Silicone by 'Dr.' Pamela Anderson, you should sign it.
Posted by: pcarini | October 15, 2008 4:00 PM
I don't see anything on the petition that says that non-US citizens aren't allowed. Hopefully it allows more than five characters (or even, god forbid, letters) in the zip/postal code area.
Posted by: JM Inc. | October 15, 2008 4:02 PM
I'm in Canada, can I sign? I'm interested in this for the same reason I'm interested in Barack Obama's campaign -- long term economic and social health for the United States is important to long term economic and social health for the rest of us.
Post Script: I guess so, since you can specify "State / Province". Done.
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | October 15, 2008 4:06 PM
I think that now might be the time to let some folks know that if this goes through, Texas will be put under an unofficial interdict as far as science students go.
Simply put, any college that isn't an unaccredited Fundie factory is going to take a dim view of the high school science credits offered up by Texas schools. Students whose grades may have got them scholarships if they'd been earned at non-Texas high schools will be surprised to learn that they might not even suffice to get them into college at all.
Posted by: Tim H | October 15, 2008 4:06 PM
Name and e-mail are the only required fields on the petition, but address is optional. I didn't check the dropdown list to see if provinces are included for the "state" field. I figure as long as I fill it out honestly, I'm not hurting anything. If they want to sort out the non-Texans, they're free to do so. (I'm from Illinois.)
Posted by: Robin Zebrowski | October 15, 2008 4:09 PM
I actually share the question (concern?) of some posters here wondering whether non-Texans signing this does any good. (Leaving aside my general belief that online petitions are sort of like prayer for the computer literate). I'll happily sign the thing if there's even a CHANCE it'll do any good, but I can't imagine anyone in Texas giving a damn what people outside the state think about their science standards. (Or people inside the state, for that matter.)
Posted by: Tim H | October 15, 2008 4:16 PM
I think we need to take Phoenix Woman's idea and expand on it. Or take it to its logical conclusion. Since a federal court has said that ID isn't science, but is in fact religion, the federal government should be required to completely cut off all education funding to states that include allowing ID in their science requirements. That'll take care of the problem rather quickly. Remember, when you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.
(I realize the Dover decision only applies to that particular fed court district so far. I am open to suggestions on how to implemen it nationwide.)
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | October 15, 2008 4:17 PM
And now for something completely different (and mildly stupid):
Richard Dawkins and Emma Watson
Posted by: Charlie Rodriguez | October 15, 2008 4:26 PM
I am a Texan I signed it. I am raising my son to know the difference between Science(reality) and Fantasy(made up stuff) It is truly amazing when he makes reality based decisions. He is seven years old. He shows more wisdom in his belief system than many adults that I know. I do not want him having to learn ID. He already calls ID "junk pseudoscience" and I couldn't be prouder. Start the fight for rationality at home and show them the light. It is the sun and it is fusing hydrogen. This is science and it was not created. I don't care what any ancient scrolls say about it.
Posted by: SC | October 15, 2008 4:26 PM
I laughed. Out loud. And I have no idea who Emma Watson is. Those photos weren't doctored at all? Very well done.
BTW, is it typical for British people to use "actors" to refer to women? Interesting.
Posted by: Newfie | October 15, 2008 4:27 PM
Happily signed and forwarded by this liberal Canuck.
Posted by: Badjuggler | October 15, 2008 4:28 PM
Everybody: Just shut up and sign the damned thing. What could it hurt? It's not a philosophy thesis.
Posted by: tsg | October 15, 2008 4:29 PM
Technically, a District Court Decision only applies to the district in which the court has jurisdiction, but it is generally expected of judges in other districts to seriously consider it when a similar case comes up in their own. And, if they expect it to survive the Supreme Court should it go there, it would be in their best interests to explain why that decision doesn't apply or is wrong if they disregard it.
Posted by: SC | October 15, 2008 4:30 PM
Nah, it's faked.
Posted by: SC | October 15, 2008 4:37 PM
The comment thread did remond me of this classic, though:
http://xkcd.com/331/
(I'll post it since windy's not here at the moment.)
Posted by: Scott Simmons | October 15, 2008 4:58 PM
Signed. And I not only live in Texas, but have two school-age children.
You don't have to be a fundie nutjob to be allowed to homeschool, right? (Sigh.)
Posted by: tsg | October 15, 2008 5:09 PM
No, but if you are a fundie nutjob and homeschooling, it's a good bet it's not to teach them evolution.
Posted by: Azdak | October 15, 2008 5:13 PM
Well, then Canadians would be morally compelled to speak up, since the non-silicone parts are Canadian as well.I've signed the thing, for what it's worth. So if you wind up with Flintstone pop-up books in your science classes, Blame Canada.
Posted by: Katharine | October 15, 2008 5:13 PM
I signed the petition - they mention nothing about atheism on their website, though, so I'm worried about whether Texans for Freedom will ensure atheists in Texas have their rights ensured, too.
Posted by: Longtime Lurker | October 15, 2008 5:15 PM
Autumn nailed it... Texas is the tail which wags the dog of textbook purchasing for the entire country. Too bad the elitist Northeast Establishment doesn't call the shots here.
Posted by: Glen Davidson | October 15, 2008 5:43 PM
This petition is being pushed by the DI, and one of the usual hacks, Robert Crowther:
Frankly, I doubt that any of these web petitions have a lot of effect, though I went ahead and "signed" the pro-science one. I suspect that they're more about engaging the public--which I do applaud on the science side.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Corydoras | October 15, 2008 5:46 PM
I'm a Brit and I signed!
Posted by: DavidH | October 15, 2008 6:01 PM
Done
Posted by: Brad | October 15, 2008 6:44 PM
Why don't the right wing fundamentalist nutters have the same enthusiasm for 'teach the controversy' when it comes to abstinence only sex education?
Disclaimer: I'm mostly right wing, mostly not a nutter and not at all fundamentalist. Plus I'm Canadian and will sign that petition.
Posted by: normalityrelief | October 15, 2008 6:55 PM
Done. Glad I can do at least something to support rationality in Texas schools...
Posted by: Sastra | October 15, 2008 7:23 PM
Cephus #5 wrote:
Oh, you mean Alternative Medicine? Yes, that is indeed making popular progress against the hegemony of science-based western-ways-of-knowing -- and now it's infiltrating major academic medical centers. Let the consumer choose!
Sorry; I agree with your sentiment, but it's not a good example. There really are a lot of people out there trying to replace the germ theory of disease with the belief that illness is actually caused by blockages in "energy fields" which can't be measured by science, but were known to ancient shaman. And, they're starting to succeed using the same sort of "teach the controversy" strategy as the Creationists: "complementary" medicine uses BOTH forms of knowledge, scientific and "alternative," in order to treat the whole person, body and soul. Ick.
Posted by: MNOSEY | October 15, 2008 7:33 PM
DONE!
FYI Canadians, just go to a Texas real estate listing for your "Texas" address.
Name and phone number -- well the internet can supply those "God given" pieces of information too.
Posted by: speedwell | October 15, 2008 7:40 PM
I'm a Texan and I signed it.
Posted by: Aquaria | October 15, 2008 7:41 PM
This will devastate UT and A&M as educational institutions. They must accept all students who graduate in the top 10% of a TX high school. It's part of their charter. Of course, nothing compels them to pass the little morons when they can't hack it, but how soon will it be before these god-bots try to force universities to teach creationism?
They won't be happy with limiting this crap to K-12 schools. They are never happy. They won't be happy when they turn Texas into Gilead, because there are all those other states to "save" too.
God's work is never done, y'know. This is why religious lunatics make such good serial killers.
Posted by: Randy Stimpson | October 15, 2008 8:09 PM
So Aquaria,
You think that creationists should not be admitted to universities?
Posted by: Patricia | October 15, 2008 8:12 PM
Done.
Posted by: Azdak | October 15, 2008 8:18 PM
Meh. I expect the power of Pharyngula is such that we don't have to resort to underhanded tactics to bolster the side we support. I used my postal code and an email address with a Canadian domain. If that's not good enough for people, the thousands of American Pharyngula readers' submissions should suffice.Thousands, right? Right?
Posted by: Wowbagger | October 15, 2008 8:27 PM
That'd be a bit difficult; it's hard to test for lying and intellectual dishonesty. One can only hope they might learn something while they're there.
Posted by: Kel | October 15, 2008 8:39 PM
Excluding anyone from getting an education is never a good idea. There should be no problem at all if creationists want to get into university to do biology, but they'll have to pass university biology classes in order to achieve. Who knows, they might even learn something in the process. Something they should have learnt already in highschool, maybe this speaks more about science's failure to teach than student ignorance. We are at a stage now where everyone is a self-proclaimed expert; we really need to show them how science works and why it's findings are not going to be replaced with a 3000 year old myth rather than the idea that any two concepts are comparable.
Posted by: Pat | October 15, 2008 9:21 PM
Randy: They will eventually exclude themselves, if they attend mainstream universities. I had a number of creationist-adherent fellow students, and they quickly turned to other disciplines after grasping that a study of Biology was impossible without evolutionary theory. Impossible. They would gird their loins with faith or whatever else and march into class for the first week of first semester. Then, by about three weeks in, after having their faith shaken by the "meh" response of others to what they were told were /devastating/ arguments against evolution, they became Political Science majors.
Posted by: rogue medic | October 15, 2008 9:54 PM
It will be interesting to see how this is handled in court. Of course, the Discovery Institute outside instigators will not help the school district pay for the significant cost of defending the stupidity of those who plan to teach Creationism as a valid alternative theory. Although the DI will make a lot of money selling their material to the schools.
If this should last, will colleges seriously view applicants with such need for remediation in science? Will non-Creationist religious schools seriously view applicants with such need for remediation in religion? Not that they are likely to want to go to someplace that recommends questioning dogma.
Posted by: Scott | October 15, 2008 10:01 PM
The Texas State Board hasn't got their fucking heads screwed on straight. They're considering taking away the extra GPA credit that kids get from taking honors courses. Are they TRYING to have no Texan kids go to college?
Posted by: SCOOTER | October 15, 2008 10:52 PM
::::::: TEXAS vs DARWIN, Counter-Attack # 1 ::::::
Jeff Tamblyn confirmed for tomorrow night Thurs 10pm Central.
Jeff Tamblyn is the producer of the documentary Kansas vs Darwin
A good place to start, the birth of FSM, first big Scopes revisited, and I believe the first appearance of ID on the national stage.
Unfortunately, we're in fund drive so no phone calls, but plenty of opportunities in the future as this will undoubtedly be the main topic of my program, and in conjunction with Staci's program, for quite some time.
Yall can call in and pledge a few bucks, if you want.
Listen @ http://stream.kpft.org/streamkpft.m3u
Posted by: Derek | October 15, 2008 11:07 PM
Signed.
Posted by: Monado | October 16, 2008 12:09 AM
Hell, my cousin and his children live in Texas. I'm a concerned citizen of Canada who wants to make sure my cousins once removed get a proper education.
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 12:18 AM
So WowBaggar,
I assume you went to college. Am I right? In your own words, what was the most convincing evidence for evolution that you learned while you were there?
Posted by: Wowbagger | October 16, 2008 12:34 AM
Randy,
You assume correctly - I went to college. However, I didn't study evolution at that level; I didn't need to in order to understand it is the only explanation for the current state of life on this planet since I'd learned it at school like everyone should.
However, I can imagine that some unfortunate people are only free to open their minds when they get to college; when they've escaped the god-soaked Lies For Jesus™ rammed down their throats by home-schooling parents and/or science teachers forced to repeat untruths because the creationist-laden, school boards will fire them if they don't.
If I must pick one thing to be the 'most convincing' evidence for evolution is the existence of DNA and the understanding of how it works and what it's for, which I accepted when my age was in single digits.
Here's what my eight-year-old brain managed to understand - and what I'm still amazed people will lie to themselves about: If god made everything, why do we need DNA, a physical instruction manual? God has magic; he can just poof everything into the way he wants it. If he can't then he isn't infinite and therefore can't, by definition, exist.
Of course, that I'd already read The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy by that stage probably helped.
Posted by: Reality Czech | October 16, 2008 11:47 AM
How long will it take before the courts hold that it's bleeding obvious that such attempts violate the First Amendment and that the school board members who voted for them do not enjoy qualified immunity?A bunch of people losing their boats, cars and houses would put the kibosh on that right quick.
Posted by: ndt | October 16, 2008 12:26 PM
Normally it wouldn't make sense for non-Texans to sign the petition. But since the Texas State Board of Education has put three non-Texans on its textbook review committee, I guess all bets are off.
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 3:23 PM
So Wowbaggar,
Your eight year old brain managed to ask it self a question that it couldn't answer and concluded that there is no God. For the record, I don't think it matters if you believe in God or not. What matters to me is the amount of bigotry and hatred spewing from this blog toward people of faith.
I hope you don't mind if I probe a little deeper. You went to college. Which one? Did you graduate? What was your major? What science classes did you take in college?
Posted by: Owlmirror | October 16, 2008 4:50 PM
Your concern is noted....
Yet of what "bigotry and hatred" do you speak?
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 4:59 PM
lol, you serious?Posted by: SASnSA | October 16, 2008 5:21 PM
Randy,
While I'm pretty sure you're just a troll looking to disrupt this thread because you're absolutely sure that creationism (or if you prefer, intelligent design) is true; let me suggest, if you're really interested in finding out about the evidence of evolution, you do the following:
First off, set aside your assumptions that the book you're reading, that is roughly based on stories written two thousand years ago by superstitious farmers and herders, and edited several times by rulers looking to forward their own agendas, is true (just for now).
Second, sit down with a good book on evolution written by a proper evolutionary scientist recently. I hear "Why Evolution Is True" by Jerry A. Coyne is a good one for beginners. Read it with a purpose of understanding it, not just glancing through looking for things to nit-pick.
Third, think for yourself. Don't just accept what you've been taught from early childhood indoctrination (this is also called brainwashing when it's done in cults), but actually consider the evidence.
Most creationists (and that includes intelligent design) say there is no evidence of evolution. There's a preponderance of evidence, creationists just choose to ignore it or write it off as baloney.
Posted by: Wowbagger | October 16, 2008 5:50 PM
My eight-year-old brain grasped that god is unneccessary to explain life.
Read for comprehension, Randy - I said I didn't study evolution at college. Apart from first-year chemistry I didn't do any hard science at all; my degree is in psychology - which, indirectly, provided me with just about everything I needed to understand religious belief.
There's not much point going into too much detail about where I did it - unless you're familiar with the relative prestige of Australian universities.
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 5:56 PM
Like the qualifications matter, of course they help but in the end it's all about the argument / evidence.
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 6:12 PM
Kel,
I wouldn't be referring to you. I visited your blog Kelosopy and read several articles and didn't find a trace of bigotry. What I found was written arguments supporting your world view. I did notice some confirmation bias. The blogs you follow all support your world view. Same thing goes for your blogroll.
I searched your blog for "entropy" and found nothing.
Posted by: Owlmirror | October 16, 2008 6:31 PM
Why on earth would this matter?
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 7:22 PM
SASnSA,
Actually I am here for debate which I consider fun. And it seems you have mistaken me for a Christian. I am not.
And can't you guys come up with a better argument then "go read a book"? I'll tell you what. I go read Why Evolution Is True if you spend 10 minutes proving to me that you are a half-way-intelligent person. I think that is a fair trade of time. All you have to do is take this 10 minute test and score 150 out of a possible 500+ points.
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 7:28 PM
It would be amazing if anyone could write something free from confirmation bias. Funny about that. :P Why would I need to talk about entropy?Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 7:38 PM
WowBaggar,
I can check Wikipedia to see how your university ranks. Did you complete a whole year of chemistry? What about highschool science classes?
Posted by: Ichthyic | October 16, 2008 7:41 PM
Why would I need to talk about entropy?
so he can cycle back the oft refuted SLoT arguments probably.
don't waste your time.
just preemptively post a link to the Index to Creationist Claims
Posted by: Ichthyic | October 16, 2008 7:43 PM
And can't you guys come up with a better argument then "go read a book"?
something tells me you aren't getting the right message out of seeing it repeated to you so often.
since there's no making a dent in your preferred level of ignorance by actually suggesting you bring yourself up to date with modern biology, try this instead:
go fuck yourself.
Posted by: Owlmirror | October 16, 2008 7:46 PM
HTML FAIL.
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 7:50 PM
I always wonder what inheritable mutations and natural selection have to do with thermodynamics. And I wonder even further that those who make the argument don't take into account that external source of energy.Posted by: Ichthyic | October 16, 2008 7:54 PM
I always wonder what inheritable mutations and natural selection have to do with thermodynamics
it's a twisted take on information theory and the "complexity" argument.
please, don't ask me to detail it (I don't have a headache, yet ;) ). the ICC actually does have a decent takedown of it, or if you really want to torture yourself, you could just google on "SloT + creationism".
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 7:56 PM
Kel,
I don't have blog roll.
There is no need for you to talk about entropy. However, if you knew more about it you might not be so confident in your world view. PZ doesn't talk about entropy either.
If you do decide to write a blog entry on the topic and how it applies to the evolution vs intelligent design debate I will be happy to comment. That's a challenge.
Posted by: Janine ID AKA The Lone Drinker | October 16, 2008 7:57 PM
Ichthyic, how about "go fuck a book"?
Posted by: Patricia | October 16, 2008 8:03 PM
Randy, Your website says you believe in god. Which one?
Posted by: Owlmirror | October 16, 2008 8:07 PM
Well, I think it could be argued that the chemical reaction that is life could not exist as we know it if energy did not flow along an irreversible entropic gradient.
But I suspect that creationists don't think along those lines...
You've seen this, right?
Fundamentalist Almost Discovers the Sun
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 8:10 PM
that's nice. I joined the blogroll in order to get my blog out there. I'm also on the Canberra blog list, though to be on that I don't have to have it in my layout :P.How do you know that my knowledge on entropy is lacking?
Maybe one day, got several more posts waiting in the wings first. Plus I'm about to commence work on a new programming project so I'm not sure how much time I'm going to have to dedicate to my blog. Hell, I might even merge the programming project with the blog and put up some HOWTOs on certain aspects of game programming. But we'll see. I may just get bored one day and do it for the hell of it.
Posted by: Ichthyic | October 16, 2008 8:10 PM
PZ doesn't talk about entropy either.
yes, he has.
you're lying again.
really, it's not hard for anyone to search the site and find out.
Posted by: Ichthyic | October 16, 2008 8:13 PM
Ichthyic, how about "go fuck a book"?
someone must have already given Stimpson that advice.
he sure doesn't actually READ them, based on what he posts.
no, I'm going to stick with suggesting he fornicate himself.
thanks, though.
;)
Posted by: Owlmirror | October 16, 2008 8:14 PM
GASP! A conspiracy of silence! EVILUSHUNISTS ARE FOUND OUT!!!
Or maybe it's a FAQ.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001.html
(and CF001_1, and CF001_2, and CF001_3, and CF001_4, and CF001_5, and so on and so forth)
Sheesh. Entropy.
Look up, dammit! No, the other up!
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 8:22 PM
If you think of entropy only in terms of its application to thermodynamics then it doesn't really apply to evolution. That's why I talk about entropy in my blog and not SLoT.
And its easy to refute a strawman argument. If you argument is going to suggest that I don't take into account external energy sources then you are refuting a strawman argument.
Posted by: Ichthyic | October 16, 2008 8:24 PM
No, the other up!
LOL
well, have fun playing with Randy. I'm off to seek sustenance of a more "material" sort.
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 8:29 PM
So you are talking about Shannon Entropy?Posted by: Owlmirror | October 16, 2008 8:37 PM
So what is this non-thermodynamic entropy of which you speak?
There are other definitions of entropy, but since you don't specify exactly what you mean, I kind of suspect that you don't know either.
If you start off with invoking a sloppy and ill-defined concept, don't be surprised if people suspect that you don't know what you're talking about.
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | October 16, 2008 8:39 PM
Kel,
You don't work for Torus Games do you?
Ichthyic,
I am actually ready three books right now.
Pro BizTalk 2006
Core Internet Application Development with ASP.NET 2.0
Biochemistry for Dummies
Does that make you feel better?
Posted by: phantomreader42 | October 16, 2008 8:41 PM
Randy the IDiot:
So, since the actual definition of entropy doesn't work for your purposes, you just make up your own definition. See, pseudoscience is so EASY! You can just make shit up whenever you feel like it! Isn't it so much fun being a Liar For Jesus™?
This Humpty-Dumpty tactic of yours is stupid and dishonest, but at least slightly less so than your fellow IDiots who don't even bother creating a fake definition when the real one doesn't help them.
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 8:45 PM
Nope, I went into general software development after I finished my degree. I'm just looking to get back into game programming in my spare time. I have an AI simulator which was my main project for university that's still half-finished. The new project I'm going to be working on is just something to do in my free time; much like my blog was a year ago.Posted by: Patricia | October 16, 2008 9:17 PM
Notice that he doesn't identify his god.
So let's have fun guessing.
I'll say it's Pan, the god of unbridled lust and sheep fornicating. Well known and loved in Enumclaw!
Posted by: Kel | October 16, 2008 10:00 PM
Advanced alien race
Posted by: Janine ID AKA The Lone Drinker | October 16, 2008 10:04 PM
But what about the advanced alien race that made the advanced alien race that made us?
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | October 16, 2008 10:12 PM
Those were the ones that evolved.Posted by: Wowbagger | October 16, 2008 10:19 PM
Randy,
I'm not a science graduate